Education Policy as a Participatory Space: Reading Community Engagement Beyond Formal Approaches

Electronic Journal of Education, Social Economics and Technology Vol. 6, No. 2, (2025), pp. 1~7, Article ID: 1338 ISSN 2723-6250 (online) DOI: https://doi.org/10.33122/ejeset.v6i2.1338 Research Article Education Policy as a Participatory Space: Reading Community Engagement Beyond Formal Approaches Muhammad Zein*, Muhammad Yunus, Bayanudin Sudin, Abdullah Abubakar, Adrian Kader Postgraduate Program, IAIN Ternate, Maluku Utara, 97727, Indonesia *Corresponding Author: | Phone: +6281340137313 ABSTRACT This research aims to analyze education policy as a participatory space by examining community involvement outside of formal approaches. The research uses a qualitative approach with a policy study design. Data was collected thru field observations, in-depth interviews with education actors and community members, and a review of relevant policy documents. The research results indicate that community participation in formal education policies is still dominated by procedural and administrative mechanisms, thus not providing adequate space for substantive involvement in decision-making. The relationship between schools and society tends to be hierarchical, which limits the bargaining power of society in determining the direction of education policy. On the other hand, more meaningful community participation is actually developing outside of formal approaches thru contextual and responsive community-based education initiatives that address local needs. This finding confirms that education policy needs to be understood as a social process that demands recognition and integration of community-based educational practices in order to create democratic and sustainable education policies. Keywords: Education Policy; Community Participation; Community-Based Education; Participatory Policy 1. INTRODUCTION Education is a social process that not only takes place in formal settings such as schools and universities but also lives and develops within the dynamics of society (Penna, 1979). Therefore, education policy cannot be understood solely as a technocratic administrative product of the state, but rather as a social construct influenced by power relations, cultural values, and the life practices of society (Genelza, 2022). In this context, education policy has the potential to become a participatory space that allows for the involvement of various actors outside the state, including local communities, families, and social organizations (Turkkahraman, 2015). However, educational policy practices in Indonesia are still dominated by formalistic and bureaucratic approaches(Rahman, 2019). Policies are formulated centrally, relying on regulations, national standards, and administrative mechanisms that tend to be top-down (Bjork, 2003). Initial observations by the author across various educational units and policy forums at the local level indicate that community involvement in education policy is generally limited to the implementation stage, rather than the formulation and evaluation processes. (Hall, 2021) Communities are often only involved as implementers of pre-determined programs, such as fulfilling school administrative tasks, providing financial support, or participating symbolically in formal meetings, without adequate space to express their aspirations, criticisms, or alternative ideas (Butterfoss, 2006). Furthermore, initial observations also indicate that the available participation mechanisms tend to be procedural and formalistic. Education consultation forums, school committees, and public consultations often proceed ceremonially, with pre-determined agendas and decisions. In practice, the voices of the community especially from marginalized groups, indigenous communities, and remote area sareless accommodated in the policy documents produced. This condition reinforces the position of society as an object of policy, rather than as a subject with contextual knowledge and a direct interest in the direction of education (Mangez & Hilgers, 2012). As a result, there is a significant gap between education policy and the reality of community needs at the grassroots level. Some policies are not entirely relevant to the local socio-cultural context, so their implementation often faces obstacles or informal adaptations in the field (Pasquini et al., 2013). These initial findings suggest that the dominance of a formalistic approach not only limits the space for public participation but also potentially undermines the effectiveness and legitimacy of the education policy itself. A formal approach to education policy does indeed play an important role in maintaining uniformity, accountability, and quality control (Salter & Tapper, 2000). However, in a socially, culturally, and geographically pluralistic society, this approach often faces limitations. Overly uniform policies often fail to respond to local needs, disregard educational Page 1 of 7 Zein et al. Electronic Journal of Education, Social Economic and Technology, Vol. 6, No. 2, (2025), pp.1~7, Article ID: 1338 practices that are alive in the community, and create a gap between policy and the reality of education at the grassroots level (Warren, 2014). Beyond formal approaches, there are various forms of community involvement in education that are nonformal and informal. (Tudor, 2013) The role of families in character formation, local communities managing alternative learning spaces, religious organizations transmitting moral and spiritual values, and indigenous groups passing down local knowledge are concrete examples that society has a great capacity and concern for education (Latchem, 2014). These practices demonstrate that education is a collective responsibility, not a state monopoly. Unfortunately, such community involvement often does not receive adequate recognition within the framework of education policy. Community participation tends to be limited to administrative aspects, such as involvement in school committees or financial support, without sufficient space for substantive engagement in decision-making. As a result, education policies risk losing social relevance and cultural legitimacy in the eyes of the public (Thurston et al., 2005). Theoretically, community participation in education policy can be understood thru the perspectives of participatory democracy and deliberative public policy. (F. Fischer, 1993) Arnstein emphasizes that participation cannot be reduced to symbolic involvement, but must be understood as the redistribution of power in decision-making. (Gea et al., 2023) In line with this, Habermas views public policy as the outcome of a deliberative process ideally built thru an inclusive space of communication between the state and citizens. In the context of education, Freire emphasized the importance of education as a liberating practice grounded in dialog and the lived experiences of the community(Vitale, 2006). A number of community-based education studies also show that substantial community inv (...truncated)